🔗 Share this article

These times exhibit a very unusual situation: the pioneering US march of the babysitters. Their attributes range in their skills and characteristics, but they all share the common goal – to prevent an Israeli violation, or even demolition, of Gaza’s fragile truce. Since the conflict concluded, there have been rare occasions without at least one of the former president's representatives on the scene. Only in the last few days included the presence of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all appearing to perform their assignments.

Israel occupies their time. In only a few short period it initiated a wave of operations in the region after the killings of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops – leading, as reported, in scores of local fatalities. A number of officials urged a restart of the fighting, and the Israeli parliament enacted a preliminary decision to take over the occupied territories. The US stance was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in several ways, the Trump administration seems more concentrated on maintaining the present, uneasy phase of the truce than on advancing to the following: the rehabilitation of Gaza. Concerning this, it appears the United States may have aspirations but little specific plans.

At present, it is unknown at what point the planned international administrative entity will truly take power, and the similar goes for the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the makeup of its personnel. On a recent day, Vance declared the US would not dictate the structure of the international unit on Israel. But if the prime minister's cabinet continues to refuse various proposals – as it acted with the Ankara's proposal recently – what occurs next? There is also the reverse question: who will decide whether the forces supported by Israel are even prepared in the mission?

The matter of the timeframe it will need to neutralize the militant group is similarly ambiguous. “Our hope in the administration is that the international security force is going to now take the lead in neutralizing the organization,” said Vance this week. “That’s will require a while.” The former president further emphasized the lack of clarity, stating in an conversation a few days ago that there is no “rigid” schedule for Hamas to lay down arms. So, hypothetically, the unknown elements of this yet-to-be-formed global contingent could enter Gaza while Hamas fighters continue to wield influence. Would they be dealing with a governing body or a guerrilla movement? Among the many of the questions surfacing. Others might question what the outcome will be for everyday residents under current conditions, with Hamas carrying on to focus on its own political rivals and opposition.

Latest events have once again underscored the blind spots of local media coverage on each side of the Gazan frontier. Each source attempts to examine every possible angle of Hamas’s breaches of the peace. And, in general, the reality that Hamas has been stalling the repatriation of the remains of deceased Israeli captives has monopolized the news.

Conversely, reporting of non-combatant casualties in the region resulting from Israeli strikes has obtained little attention – if at all. Consider the Israeli response actions after Sunday’s southern Gaza occurrence, in which two military personnel were fatally wounded. While Gaza’s sources claimed dozens of fatalities, Israeli television pundits complained about the “moderate reaction,” which targeted just installations.

This is not new. During the recent weekend, Gaza’s information bureau charged Israeli forces of breaking the peace with Hamas multiple times since the agreement was implemented, resulting in the loss of dozens of individuals and injuring another 143. The claim appeared irrelevant to most Israeli news programmes – it was merely absent. Even accounts that 11 members of a Palestinian family were fatally shot by Israeli troops a few days ago.

Gaza’s rescue organization reported the family had been trying to return to their residence in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City when the transport they were in was targeted for reportedly going over the “demarcation line” that marks areas under Israeli military authority. That yellow line is unseen to the naked eye and appears just on charts and in official records – sometimes not available to ordinary people in the territory.

Even this incident scarcely rated a reference in Israeli media. One source mentioned it shortly on its digital site, citing an IDF representative who stated that after a suspicious vehicle was identified, troops shot alerting fire towards it, “but the transport persisted to move toward the forces in a fashion that created an direct threat to them. The troops shot to remove the risk, in compliance with the ceasefire.” No fatalities were stated.

Given this framing, it is little wonder many Israelis believe the group alone is to responsible for breaking the peace. That perception threatens prompting demands for a more aggressive strategy in the region.

Sooner or later – maybe sooner rather than later – it will not be enough for American representatives to take on the role of kindergarten teachers, instructing the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need